If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

I keep thinking in terms of the anti-thesis of I Timothy 6: 20. The idea keeps coming up that the contemporary Marxist Left opposes the American Republic by an anti-thesis just as the dispensationalists oppose the Gospel of Christ by an anti-thesis. Both of these anti-thesis oppositions have their origin in history, although the Marxist opposition has a much shorter history.

That is, the dispensationalist anti-thesis goes all the way back to the Talmudic Judaism of the multitude in the period right before the appearance of Christ and goes on until 70 A.D. Somehow, to dispensationalists, since that Talmudic Judaism is old and appears to have some authority in the Old Testament and is of the multitude, it is that which is their "Truth." Once that "Truth" is set in their minds, they are unable to understand that what Paul is talking about in Galatians 3: 14 - that the promise is of the Spirit through faith - is found in the Old Testament. An example of this is Deuteronomy 10: 16, "Circumcise therefore the foreskin of your heart, and be no more stiffnecked." Deuteronomy 10: 16

And........"And the LORD thy God will circumcise thine heart, and the heart of thy seed, to love the LORD thy God with all thine heart, and with all thy soul, that thou mayest live." Deuteronomy 30: 6

"Circumcise yourselves to the LORD, and take away the foreskins of your heart, ye men of Judah and inhabitants of Jerusalem: lest my fury come forth like fire, and burn that none can quench it, because of the evil of your doings." Jeremiah 4: 4

You would probably see Marxism as beginning in 1848 with the Communist Manifesto and in 1867 with Das Kapital.

But Marxism is more than a mere political and economic theory. It is philosophical in that it derives from Immanuel Kant, Georg Hegel, Ludwig Feuerbach, Jean-Jacques Rousseau and from the Jacobins of the French Revolution.

In deriving from Hegel's bringing of the philosophy of the dialectic in ancient Greek philosophy into modern philosophy as well as into modern thought and discourse, Marxism is a kind of epistemology. Epistemology is the study of the basis for knowledge, an examination of thought itself. That focus can move toward psychology.

And the Frankfurt School of Marxism did first mix Marx with Freud and later in the U.S, it mixed Marx with American personality and social psychology, especially the Group Dynamics movement, the Encounter Group movement and self psychology.

Marxism made use of social engineers in psychology. Marxism sought to change the culture based upon Biblical Christianity, the family and a type of capitalism which encouraged and allowed a huge number of small businesses to exist.Monopoly capitalism and a financial and corporate ruling elite can have more control than an economic system with a huge number of small business owners.

Marx himself tells us something of what Marxism is about in this statement: "In the eyes of the dialectical philosophy, nothing is established for
all time, nothing is absolute or sacred." (Karl Marx)

Benjamin Bloom, who wrote the two volume book on the Taxonomy
of Educational Goal Objectives, by which all teachers must be
certified, said "“We recognize the point of view that
truth and knowledge are only relative and that there are no hard and
fast truths which exist for all time and places.” (Benjamin Bloom, et
al., Taxonomy of Educational Objectives, Book 1, Cognitive Domain)

"Once the earthly family is discovered to be the secret of the
heavenly family, the former must be destroyed (annihilated), in theory
and in practice." Karl Marx, Feuerbach Thesis #4

This is the historical basis of the contemporary American Political Correctness movement, which forms the anti-thesis to the U.S. Constitutional Republic.

Is this the sentence you are talking about? "Marxism sought to change the culture based upon Biblical Christianity, the family and a type of capitalism which encouraged and allowed a huge number of small businesses to exist."

One of the founders of the Frankfuret School of Transformational Marxism, Georg Lukacs, talked about "Abolishment of Culture." Lukacs knew that Christianity had created a dominant culture in the West which made the individual important and that culture saw each individual as being unique, to be honored as such.

Marxism had to get rid of that Christian - and family based - culture which made the individual outstanding, and replace it by a collectivist group oriented culture. Marxism - Transformational Marxism - had to reduce the spiritual power of the Christian Gospel in order to bring in a collectivist group-centered culture.

Lukacs probably had a better understanding of how the doctrines of Christ in the Protestantism of the 19th century created a culture which encouraged individuals and honored them more than does Catholicism.

What effect has dispensationalism had upon the emphasis of the dominant culture on honoring of the individual?

"Lukacs identified that any political movement capable of bringing
Bolshevism to the West would have to be, in his words, "demonic"; it
would have to "possess the religious power which is capable of filling
the entire soul; a power that characterized primitive Christianity."

They go on to say that "What differentiated the West from Russia,
Lukacs identified, was a
Judeo-Christian cultural matrix which emphasized exactly the
uniqueness and sacredness of the individual which Lukacs abjured. At
its core, the dominant Western ideology maintained that the
individual, through the exercise of his or her reason, could discern
the Divine Will in an unmediated relationship. What was worse, from
Lukacs' standpoint: this reasonable relationship necessarily implied
that the individual could and should change the physical universe in
pursuit of the Good; that Man should have dominion over Nature, as
stated in the Biblical injunction in Genesis. The problem was, that as
long as the individual had the belief—or even the hope of the
belief—that his or her divine spark of reason could solve the problems
facing society, then that society would never reach the state of
hopelessness and alienation which Lukacs recognized as the necessary
prerequisite for socialist revolution."

Does present day dispensationalism have the "the religious power which is capable of filling the entire soul" that Lukacs talked about?

Is this the sentence you are talking about? "Marxism sought to change the culture based upon Biblical Christianity, the family and a type of capitalism which encouraged and allowed a huge number of small businesses to exist."

One of the founders of the Frankfuret School of Transformational Marxism, Georg Lukacs, talked about "Abolishment of Culture." Lukacs knew that Christianity had created a dominant culture in the West which made the individual important and that culture saw each individual as being unique, to be honored as such.

Marxism had to get rid of that Christian - and family based - culture which made the individual outstanding, and replace it by a collectivist group oriented culture. Marxism - Transformational Marxism - had to reduce the spiritual power of the Christian Gospel in order to bring in a collectivist group-centered culture.

Lukacs probably had a better understanding of how the doctrines of Christ in the Protestantism of the 19th century created a culture which encouraged individuals and honored them more than does Catholicism.

What effect has dispensationalism had upon the emphasis of the dominant culture on honoring of the individual?

"Lukacs identified that any political movement capable of bringing
Bolshevism to the West would have to be, in his words, "demonic"; it
would have to "possess the religious power which is capable of filling
the entire soul; a power that characterized primitive Christianity."

They go on to say that "What differentiated the West from Russia,
Lukacs identified, was a
Judeo-Christian cultural matrix which emphasized exactly the
uniqueness and sacredness of the individual which Lukacs abjured. At
its core, the dominant Western ideology maintained that the
individual, through the exercise of his or her reason, could discern
the Divine Will in an unmediated relationship. What was worse, from
Lukacs' standpoint: this reasonable relationship necessarily implied
that the individual could and should change the physical universe in
pursuit of the Good; that Man should have dominion over Nature, as
stated in the Biblical injunction in Genesis. The problem was, that as
long as the individual had the belief—or even the hope of the
belief—that his or her divine spark of reason could solve the problems
facing society, then that society would never reach the state of
hopelessness and alienation which Lukacs recognized as the necessary
prerequisite for socialist revolution."

Does present day dispensationalism have the "the religious power which is capable of filling the entire soul" that Lukacs talked about?

for what it is worth, the life of the D'ist churches that I knew when I was young was vibrant enough, even if it had no clear connection to the complicated doctrinal thoughts. They had that kind of power. But people are not always rationally connected or connecting what they believe to what they do. I don't find any similar spiritual power hearing about Israel winning the 6 Day War. They do.

I think for some of them it is a solution to the gap which modern atheism and uniformitarianism have created in our minds between the Bible and ordinary reality (hence the 1st question about anyone mentioning prayer, church, Christ is 'are they religious?'--ie, operating in a completely different epistemological world from ordinary reality).

"for what it is worth, the life of the D'ist churches that I knew when I was young was vibrant enough, even if it had no clear connection to the complicated doctrinal thoughts. They had that kind of power. But people are not always rationally connected or connecting what they believe to what they do. I don't find any similar spiritual power hearing about Israel winning the 6 Day War. They do."

When I was about 14 to 16 I was a member of a Southern Baptist Church in Texas. That preacher did not preach dispensationalist doctrines and some of what he preached might be called Calvinism. That was before W.A. Crisswell of the First Baptist Church of Dallas led the Convention to become totally dispensationalist and kicked out non-dispensationalists from its seminaries.

Then, when I was 18 and a Freshman at Texas A and I College a group of A and I students in the Southern Baptist Congregation in Kingsville, including myself, made a trip to Dallas - a long way from down inside the King Ranch - to hear W.A Crisswell preach, a trip probably inspired by that Kingsville Baptist preacher. That preacher did not spend time talking about the doctrines of dispensationalism. I remember listening to radio preachers later who did not spend time talking about the doctrines of dispensationalism. Some of these preachers might have been thought to have an anointing. But if they did have a real spiritual power from the Spirit, it was not from dispensationalism, but from the Gospel itself.

Texas A and I College was taken over by the Texas A and M System some years ago.

for what it is worth, the life of the D'ist churches that I knew when I was young was vibrant enough, even if it had no clear connection to the complicated doctrinal thoughts. They had that kind of power."

It is the sinister power of brainwashing, IMO. All wrapped up in religious, pious packaging.

"The immutable God never learned anything and never changed his mind. He knew everything from eternity."

" The difference between faith and saving faith are the propositions believed." Gordon H. Clark

"If a man be lost, God must not have the blame for it; but if a man be saved, God must have the glory of it." Charles Spurgeon

Only you guys are brainwashed about the land. There is nothing of the sort in the NT. You can reunify those tribes in Christ without any land.

You think the letter that 'needs' the land--to make the letter true--is Hebrews, yet Hebrews says that kind of covenant is set aside/replaced, and knew the desolation of Israel (the land) was about to happen!

The new covenant is better because Christ's sacrifice is actually effective to erase sin and provide victory over death, which has to do with all people, not just one race. You are deluded to think otherwise.

Only you guys are brainwashed about the land. There is nothing of the sort in the NT. You can reunify those tribes in Christ without any land.

You think the letter that 'needs' the land--to make the letter true--is Hebrews, yet Hebrews says that kind of covenant is set aside/replaced, and knew the desolation of Israel (the land) was about to happen!

The new covenant is better because Christ's sacrifice is actually effective to erase sin and provide victory over death, which has to do with all people, not just one race. You are deluded to think otherwise.